Lok Sarokar Samiti, Sultanpur V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

ITA 130/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4302 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 26-05-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 14-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R C JAIN C A SHRI RAJIV JAIN
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 130/LKW/16 ASSESSMENT YEAR:N.A. 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P. K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.130/LKW/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR:N.A. LOK SAROKAR SAMITI, 18/18 NARAINPUR, NORTH OF K.V. 400, JAUNPUR ROAD, SULTANPUR. PAN:AAAAL8603K VS. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER P. K. BANSAL, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW DATED 30/04/2015. THE GRIEVAN CE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO THE REJECTION OF APPLICAT ION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. THERE IS DELAY OF 243 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. THE REASONS EXPLAINED FOR THE DELAY IN THE CONDONATION APPLICATION DATED 14/0 3/2016 ARE AS UNDER: 1. THE APPELLANT IS A SOCIETY REGISTERED WITH TH E OBJECT OF CARRYING OUT SOCIAL WORK IN THE AREA OF ITS OPERATI ONS. APPELLANT BY SHRI R. C. JAIN, C. A. RESPONDENT BY SHRI RAJIV JAIN CIT,, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 26/05/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 27 /0 7 /2016 I.T.A. NO. 130/LKW/16 ASSESSMENT YEAR:N.A. 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAD APPLIED BEFORE THE HON'BLE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) VIDE APPLICATION DATED 18 -10- 2014 FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 AND SUBMITTED THE REQUIRED DETAILS/ DOCUMENTS. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCK NOW VIDE ORDER DATED 30-04-2015 REJECTED THE ASSESSEE'S APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WHICH WAS RECEIVED ON 16-05-2015. 4. IN THE HOPE THAT THE LEARNED HON'BLE COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) WILL CONSIDER OUR APPLICATIO N AND GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1 961 IN THE INTEREST OF LAW AND JUSTICE, WE AGAIN FILED APP LICATION DATED 22-07-2015 AND SUBMITTED VARIOUS DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF OUR PROPOSAL. 5. IN THE MEANWHILE, WE WERE ADVISED TO WITHDRAW OU R 2 ND APPLICATION OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME T AX ACT, 1961 AND MOVE FOR APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LUCKNOW AGAINST THE ORIGINAL OR DER, I.E., ORDER DATED 30-04-2015 OF HON'BLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW. 6. WE ACCORDINGLY WITHDREW OUR FRESH APPLICATION DA TED 22- 07-2015 FOR GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT, 1961. AS SUCH THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW VIDE ORDER DATED 05-01-201 6 REJECTED THE REGISTRATION SOUGHT U/S 12A OF THE INC OME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ORDER DATED 05-01-2015 OF REJECTION WAS RECEIVED ON 20-01-2016 AND WE IMMEDIATELY TOOK STEP S TO FILE APPEAL AGAINST ORDER DATED 30-04-2015. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE REASONS NARRATED BY THE A SSESSEE IN ITS CONDONATION APPLICATION, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE PENALIZED FOR THE DEFAULT COMMITTED DUE TO WRONG A DVICE AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE IN N OT FILING THE APPEAL WITHIN THE PERMISSIBLE TIME. WE ACCORDINGLY, CONDO NE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. I.T.A. NO. 130/LKW/16 ASSESSMENT YEAR:N.A. 3 4. THE FACTS RELATED TO THIS CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 12A(A) OF THE I.T. ACT, 19 61 ON 18/10/2014 SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER THE SAID SECTION. THE LEARNED C IT REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND PASSED EX-PARTE OR DER BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY COULD NOT PRODUCE BILLS AND VO UCHERS IN RESPECT OF EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO JUSTIFY THE CRE DITWORTHINESS OF EXPENSES. THE LEARNED CIT HELD THAT THE OBJECT OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES HAVE TO BE PROVED BEFORE GRANTING THE REGISTRATION AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY CO ULD NOT BE GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. ACCORDINGL Y, THE REGISTRATION SOUGHT WAS REJECTED. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US VEHEM ENTLY CONTENDED THAT THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) HAS PASSED AN EX-PARTE OR DER AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT WITHOUT AFFORDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ON GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES. 3. LEARNED D. R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTIONS). 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, CAREFULLY C ONSIDERED THE SAME ALONG WITH THE ORDER OF CIT (EXEMPTIONS). WE NOTED FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) THAT HE HAS PASSED AN EX-PARTE ORD ER. THE FACT IS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT EFFECTIVELY BEEN HEARD. WE, THEREF ORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY TO BOTH THE PARTIES SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) WITH THE DIRECTION THAT HE SHALL DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE AS SESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS I.T.A. NO. 130/LKW/16 ASSESSMENT YEAR:N.A. 4 ALSO DIRECTED TO CO-OPERATE WITH THE CIT (EXEMPTION S) AND PROVIDE ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION AND DOCUMENT ASKED FOR BY CIT (EXEMPTIONS). 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/07/2016) SD/. SD/. ( MAHAVIR PRASAD ) ( P. K. BANSAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:27/07/2016 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASST T. REGISTRAR